Moving Beyond Subjective Well-Being

Introduction

The goal of this research note is to critique the dominant, sub-jective well-being (SWB) conceptualization of tourist happiness and argue for an alternative conceptualization. Tourist happi-ness, for the purposes of this article, is broadly understood as a psychological state of fulfillment and well-being that is experi-enced in anticipatory, on site, and reflective travel phases. In tourism, conceptualizations of tourist happiness ultimately affect how destination experiences are promoted and how the psycho-logical benefits of tourist experiences are understood and meas-ured. In recent years, there has been an increase in research and conceptual articles on this topic (Corvo, 2010; Gilbert & Abdullah, 2004; Kler & Tribe, in press; Nawijn, 2011; Nawijn, Miquelle, Marchand, Veenhoven, & Vingerhoets, 2010). There has also been a related focus of academic research in tourism and hospitality on memorable experiences (Yuan & Wu, 2008), commonly drawing from the seminal work by Pine and Gilmore (1998) on experience economy. In the hospitality field, there is an aligned growing research interest in investigat-ing highly enjoyable gastronomic experiences (Kivela & Crotts, 2009).

There are several key reasons for engaging with the happi-ness topic at this moment in time. First, the discussions and the research work on happiness help shed light on the subjective value of holiday experiences to tourists. For a long time, this value has been assumed. Little research, however, existed to back up the idea that holidays are a vehicle for experiencing happiness or to explain how happiness may be experienced by tourists at different travel phases. Second, the happiness re-search helps in better understanding the potential relationship between tourism and mental health. The World Health Organiza-tion (WHO) predicts depression to be the single biggest cause of ill health by the year 2020 (Lopez, Mathers, Ezzati, Jamison, & Murray, 2006), so it is timely to investigate how various global forces, such as tourism, could positively affect people and make them happy or happier. In the United Kingdom, the Na-tional Health Service (NHS) has recently commenced a trial pro-gram on how outdoor activities, such as surfing, can assist in making people less depressed (BBC, 2010). A similar program about tourist experiences and depression, the Good Mood Safari (2008) project, was successfully completed in Australia, and it involved business executives visiting wellness retreat cen-ters. Tourism Australia has also recently embarked on a No Leave, No Life campaign, which encourages Australians to use their paid annual leave and look after their health and well-being (Tourism Australia, 2010). Furthermore, the industry sees happiness as a powerful promotional tool. Vanuatu has been voted the happiest place in the world (Happy Planet Index, 2011; http://www.happyplanetindex.org/news/), and the coun-try’s tourism authorities promote the psychological benefits of visiting Vanuatu through the new slogan “Discover What Matters” (STW Group, 2011). So, happiness is a topic of increasing relevance to the study, practice, and promotion of tourism.

Yet Diener’s (2009) extensive review shows that definitions of happiness are ambiguous. Christopher and Hickinbottom (2008) note two ways of broadly conceptualizing happi-ness from a psychological standpoint: as SWB; Diener, 2009) and as authentic happiness (Seligman, 2002). Diener, Suh, Lucas, and Smith offer the following specific definition of SWB: “a broad category of phenomena that includes peo-ple’s emotional responses, domain satisfactions and global judgments of life satisfaction” (1999, p. 277). High SWB hence consists of the mix of three factors: the relative absence of anxiety and depression, frequent and intense positive affective states, and global life satisfaction (Diener, 2009). On the other hand, the authentic happiness conceptualization sug-gests that happiness is about having positive emotions (love, interest, joy, and contentment), engagement (a sense of in-volvement in daily life activities), and a sense of meaning or pur-pose in life. This authentic happiness view has been recently expanded to also include positive relationships and achievement (Seligman, 2011).

Tourists’ happiness, however, has so far been typi-cally understood as their SWB (Corvo, 2010; Gilbert & Ab-dullah, 2004). Tourism researchers have thus largely not used Seligman’s theories. Yet it is questionable if SWB should continue to be the dominant way of conceptualizing tour-ist happiness. McCabe, Joldersma, and Li (2010) note that there have been a large percentage of yearly increases in tourism participation, but the impact of these increases on levels of hap-piness of tourists remains not well understood. This arti-cle highlights two problems in conceptualizing tourist happiness as SWB: (a) the difficulty of SWB in explaining meaningful holi-day experiences and (b) the difficulty of SWB in explaining en-gaging on-site experiences. It is argued that the authentic hap-piness conceptualization includes more relevant theoretical constructs (positive emotions, engagement, and a sense of meaning and purpose in life) that explain tourist happiness in relation to tourist experiences better than SWB.

Meaning and Holiday Reflections

It appears that the SWB approach to conceptualizing tourist happiness sheds little light on meaning and holiday reflections. A fulfilling tourist experience is arguably one that is characterized not just by pleasure but also by how personally meaningful tour-ists found their holiday activities. Meaning in life can be defined as “the sense made of, and significance felt regarding, the nature of one’s being and existence” (Steger, Frazier, Oishi, & Kaler, 2006, p. 81). From the 1970s, and particularly after the year 2000, research on SWB started to flourish (Kahneman, 1999; Kahneman, Diener, & Schwarz, 1999; Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). While satisfaction-with-life scales touch on aspects of life’s meaning in their assessments (e.g., a rank from 0 to 10 on satis-faction with spirituality; Diener, 2009), the SWB theory suggests that happiness is mostly about what makes people feel good. As Layard (2005) points out in his examination of SWB, one can identify and talk about happiness in terms of feeling good or feel-ing bad.

Perhaps because of the undisputed popularity of SWB in the literature, researchers in tourism have by and large adopted this emphasis on pleasure (or feeling good) instead of meaning (Gil-bert & Abdullah, 2004; Nawijn et al., 2010). Recent re-search has also importantly revealed that vacationers are hap-pier than nonvacationers but that such happiness effects typi-cally do not last long after a holiday ends (Nawijn et al., 2010) as the pleasure effects quickly dissipate. This emphasis does not suggest that tourism authors believe that happiness is only pleasure but that the scales used to analyze tourist happiness through the SWB lens cannot sufficiently assess experiences that are meaningful.

There is support for this argument by Jayawickreme, Pawelski, and Seligman (in press). They point out that people (and hence tourists) are not simply experience machines and thus a lifetime of artificially induced positive emotions would not be chosen by many people. The authors refer to Wittgenstein’s alleged last words: “Tell them it’s [life’s] beauti-ful,” uttered by a highly dysphonic man, whose life while low in all senses of pleasure was high in meaning. The words are meant to suggest that life can be beautiful and fulfilling despite a lack of pleasures.

Many tourists do not just have pleasures but evaluate them as bad or good for themselves. Backpackers, for instance, in Noy’s (2004) research report a profound self-change. They are portrayed as narrators, whose stories strongly feature themes of authenticity and adventure as part of the powerful experience of self-change. Likewise, in research on independent female tourists and their experiences, Wilson and Harris (2006) showed that meaningful travel centered around three key themes: a search for self and identity, self-empowerment, and connectedness with others/global citizenship–themes that are clearly much more about the nature of one’s being and existence (Steger et al., 2006) than pleasure. Kristjansson (2010) similarly argues that “people would not in retrospect, count themselves as happy even if their brains had been connected to a machine that guaranteed them uninterrupted flow of hedonistic pleasure (p. 300)”. Such effects might be longer lasting than pleasures. So it may be problematic to place too much emphasis on pleasure versus meaning in conceptualizing tourist happiness. It is perhaps equally problematic that the SWB theory, with its judgments of life satisfaction and emotional responses, does not explain the powerful, engaging moments that characterize many fulfilling tourist events and situations.

Engagement and On-Site Experiences

A major component of SWB is life satisfaction (Cummins, 2009). Veenhoven (2003) argues that questions about an overall appreciation of one’s life would successfully capture everything that is important to that person’s happiness. Nussbaum (2003, 2008), however, points out that overall appreciations of life lead people to aggregate various experiences–good, bad, and ordinary–into a single whole. There is a tradition in tourism research of understanding special tourist moments (Mannell & Iso-Ahola, 1987; Hom Cary, 2004) and powerful, engaging on-site experiences (Han, Um, & Mills, 2005). This tourism research is about understanding powerful single tourist events and immediacy, not about reflections on overall tourist experiences. Some time ago, Botterill (1987) suggested that these unpredictable events and moments often end up being most gratifying for tourists and hence should be studied and understood separately. Wang (1999), in his discussion of existential authenticity in tourism, comes to similar conclusions after highlighting a long tradition of tourism research of authenticity, starting with MacCannell (1979). Existential authenticity in tourism is, for example, about the mutually exhilarating feeling of hosts and tourists when they feel special while dancing together (Daniel, 1996), but it is not about the forced smile of airline personnel or travel agents (Hochschild, 1983). Existential authenticity is a powerful, genuine state in which a tourist feels fulfilled (Heidegger, 1927). So SWB appears problematic in terms of explaining these powerful tourist moments. Although they are useful and informative for some overall appreciations, life satisfaction questions may simply be too broad to allow a full understanding of tourist happiness and the texture and richness of special tourist situations and events.

Literature on engagement in tourism psychology may assist in better appreciating this texture and richness. Powerful sense of engagement (involvement and mindful attention) is referred to as the state of flow in psychology (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). Flow has been linked in the tourism literature to the context of powerful on-site experiences at cultural sites (Han, Um, & Mills, 2005) as well as to more active adventure activities, such as white water rafting (Ryan, 1995). This state of engagement or flow can be measured through flow state scales (Jackson & Eklund, 2004), flow interviews (Jackson, 1992), or experience-sampling techniques that involve the use of electronic pagers to record instant reactions to places and activities. Kler and Tribe (in press) in their recent article on scuba diving tourist experiences equally point to the importance of engagement as a key concept in deciphering tourists’ sense of fulfillment, despite not measuring it directly.

Hence, any conceptualization of tourist happiness should include evaluations of engagement and meaning to capture the fuller extent of a fulfilling tourist experience. There is a way of conceptualizing tourist happiness that allows for a better understanding of holiday meanings and powerful on-site experiences but that also assesses pleasures.

Alternative to Subjective Well-Being

Pearce, Filep, and Ross (2011) conceive tourist happiness in terms of the three key phases of the travel experience: anticipatory, on site, and reflective (Larsen, 2007). Filep’s (2009) research drew from Seligman’s ideas and revealed a picture of tourists’ happiness across these phases. The picture showed how travel motivations, on-site experiences, and reflections on experiences are linked to the authentic happiness elements of positive emotions, engagement, and meaning (Seligman, 2002). An analysis of 60 narratives and interviews with 20 Australian study-abroad university student travelers and a separate analysis of 200 questionnaires revealed that tourist happiness is about travel motivations for relationship and belonging, safety and comfort, curiosity and mental stimulation, and self-development. The motives resemble the core motives of tourists identified earlier by Pearce (2005). The motives in Filep’s (2009) work are, respectively, linked to the positive emotions of love and contentment, a motive for engagement, and a motive for meaning. So when tourists are motivated by curiosity and mental stimulation, they are in fact motivated by a search for engagement—an element of happiness according to the authentic happiness view (Seligman, 2002). The tourist happiness study further revealed that tourist happiness is about powerful on-site experiences characterized by themes such as time transformation (a perception that time slows down or speeds up during a gratifying tourist moment), feelings of calm and tranquility, and a full concentration and focus on aspects of the site visited. Last, it was revealed that tourist happiness is about reflecting on some of the challenges faced by the tourists during their study-abroad year and feelings of exhilaration from meeting those challenges. It is also about reflecting on eudaemonic (meaningful) tourist events. One participant in the study noted, “I realised there is more to this world than the materialism we at times bind ourselves to in our daily life.” Another tourist said, “I came to know Spain better than I ever had before.” Kler and Tribe (in press) similarly used the authentic happiness framework to study tourist happiness. Descriptions of eudaemonia were uncovered in their analysis of tourists’ reflections. Through in-depth interviews about diving holiday experiences with 16 participants, they identified themes of “learning” and “personal growth” as key to understanding fulfilling diving experiences.

This non-SWB picture of tourist happiness may not be complete, especially considering Seligman’s (2011) recent refinement of the authentic happiness theory and the evolution of the PERMA model (positive emotions, engagement, relationships, meaning, and achievement). It remains unclear if this new model would better explain tourist happiness through the lens of psychology across the anticipatory, on-site, and reflective travel phases. Nevertheless, it would not be possible to capture the eudaemonic reflections from the scuba divers or to understand the nature of the powerful on-site experiences of the student travelers through the current SWB approaches (Diener, 2009). Hence, research methods such as narratives of perfect days, in-depth flow interviews, cognitive maps of ideal holidays, or focus groups where tourists can be asked to describe their special, memorable tourist events may reveal more about tourist happiness than is currently possible through SWB (Filep & Deery, 2010).

Conclusion

In the future, the tradition of SWB research (Kahneman, 1999; Kahneman et al., 1999) will probably continue to shape future tourist happiness conceptualization and measurement (Gilbert & Abdullah, 2004) despite the specified weaknesses of SWB. Yet revisions of this dominant conceptualization and refinements in research methods are clearly needed (Diener, 2009). Therefore, for researchers who prefer to conceptualize tourist happiness as SWB, Diener (2009) notes that psychometric testing and refinement of SWB scales are required. Specifically, additional psychometric properties need to be explored, such as response interval sizes, sensitivity to change, factor purity, and discriminant validity. Additionally, Diener argues that investigators need to understand the scale properties (e.g., sensitivity and skewness) within their particular sample as discrepancies in correlational results between studies are sometimes attributable to such factors (Diener, 2009). Last, validation of the scales is needed in terms of external non-self-report criteria such as interviewer ratings, peer ratings, facial coding, and other non-verbal measures.

The way forward may be different for tourism researchers using Seligman’s (2002, 2011) authentic happiness and PERMA theories. Advancement to the conceptualization of tourist happiness could here include possible integration of PERMA’s achievement and positive relationships elements with the travel phases and the motivation and the satisfaction themes proposed (Filep, 2009). If such integration happens and if the PERMA ideas are of value to tourism, the tourist happiness picture could be revised or extended.

Methodologically, the way forward in this tradition could include continued use of qualitative research methods to capture meanings and engagement. Additionally, opportunities for triangulating the qualitative findings with relevant quantitative measures such as authentic happiness questionnaires could also be explored in tourism (Kler & Tribe, in press). Last, there is an opportunity for methodological improvement in cross-cultural settings. Seligman’s conceptions of happiness have been criticized by some scholars (Christopher & Hickinbottom, 2008), who have labeled them as ethnocentric. The applicability of the authentic happiness index and PERMA to non-Western cultures has been questioned. For the Balinese, there are two equally valid realms of meaning—sekala, the ordinary realm of daily life (one that is visible to most tourists), and niskala, the spiritual world and a deeper level of reality (Christopher & Hickinbottom, 2008). Cross-cultural evaluations of meaning could potentially be advanced through qualitative assessments that may capture multiple layers of meaning, as in the Balinese case.

These amendments would ensure that tourist happiness research continues to make a timely, scientific, and meaningful contribution to tourism theory and practice. As Diener (2009) avers, dealing with the conceptualization challenge is fundamental to future progress in this research field. Conceptualizations affect our assumptions about what is tourist happiness and ultimately our conclusions about the value of tourist experiences to tourists and to the tourism industry.